Re: The Latest Offense

[P3D John W Roberts <roberts@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 12:45:46 -0500
>From: "P3D Dr. George A. Themelis" <fj834@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: The Latest Offense

>>On the box for a PC sound board (i.e. like a SoundBlaster):
>>                    "3D Stereo Sound!"
>>I wish I was making this up...

>The way I see it, the term "stereo" is an abbreviation of either
>"stereoscopic" (when applied to images) or "stereophonic" (when applied to
>sound).  "Stereo" is a Greek word meaning "solid".  3-D stands for "three- 
>dimensional" and it is a valid substitute for "solid" or "stereo".  

>I don't see why sound should not be called "3d" as a substitute for
>"stereo" since it fills and appears to be coming from the three-
>dimensional space.  In other words, if you accept "stereo" as a valid
>characterization for sound then you should not have a problem with 3D.

Good points.

Is there any way to find out more about the recent advances in "3D" sound,
without clogging up P3D with discussions? Maybe a nice URL or pointer to
a newsgroup or mailing list? 3D stereo sound (as opposed to 3D acoustic
imaging) doesn't really seem to qualify as "photography".

In the long run, I expect 3D imagery and 3D sound will go together. When
you put on your VR set, you'll want to hear "the rest of the story" coming
right from the mouth of the virtual Paul Harvey, echoing off the virtual
walls and furniture in the virtual room, and so on.

John R


------------------------------